Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pi Rho Zeta
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Daniel (talk) 11:16, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Pi Rho Zeta (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Puff piece on non-notable local frat, deleted by prod and brought back. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 08:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- What makes this fraternity non-notable? There are plenty of articles on wikipdiea about local fraternaties. --lightdarkness (talk) 00:40, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Fraternity article is rated as Mid importance level on the Quality Scale of the Fraternities and Sororities Project and contributes to the understanding on the issue of Local Fraternities. AcriAL (talk) 05:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-arguments. This frat has 44 Google hits. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 11:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Phlegm Rooster's argument is not valid because 'Google Hits' are not perpetual, they can change from computer to computer, day to day.AcriAL (talk) 02:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Non-arguments. This frat has 44 Google hits. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 11:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A one-college fraternity would have to do something really notable, and the minor local activities are not anywhere near enough, as is shown by the fact that nobody outside the college has bothered to write anything about them. DGG (talk) 22:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep From the Project Description: "...the Fraternities and Sororities WikiProject, (is) an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Greek Life on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to International social societies, local organizations, honor societies, and their members.AcriAL (talk) 02:43, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No evidence of significant, independent coverage provided and none found in a search so fails WP:ORG. The interest and scope of a WikiProject is irrelevant to the notability requirements. Nuttah (talk) 08:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The reason the scope was cited is by the definition of a local organization (e.g. a fraternity encompassing one or two schools), they are bound to be smaller in scope. As per the notability guidelines, notability is not fame, merely "worthy of notice". If there are problems with the article itself, any competent editing help can ensure it is consistent with guidelines. AcriAL (talk) 17:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It's hard to improve an article if there are no sources for anything notable to write about. DGG (talk) 16:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, well if the consensus turns out to be that this article is not notable enough for inclusion, is there anything precluding the expansion of the sub-article "Alfred State College" to include additional information about constituent organizations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.45.20.169 (talk) 23:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- No there is not, and I'll be delighted to provide the content of this article on request to a registered user who plans on incorporating it. Stifle (talk) 08:50, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Alright, well if the consensus turns out to be that this article is not notable enough for inclusion, is there anything precluding the expansion of the sub-article "Alfred State College" to include additional information about constituent organizations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.45.20.169 (talk) 23:51, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It's hard to improve an article if there are no sources for anything notable to write about. DGG (talk) 16:48, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per DGG. Wikiprojects do not get to set binding inclusion standards for articles in their purview. Stifle (talk) 08:51, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.